Genesis 2: God’s Blessings and Gifts to Mankind

Introduction: Beginning in the late nineteenth century, the book of Genesis began to receive sustained criticism in both the scientific community and within academia. As discussed in the prior studies, in 1858 Charles Darwin started a revolt in the biological world with his book, “On the Origin of Species”. In 1876, academics also began to attack the integrity of Genesis text by alleging that it was derived from different authors at different times. That year, a German named Julius Wellhausen published a book called “The Composition of the Hexateuch and the historical books of the Old Testament”. His book challenged the view held for centuries that Moses wrote the first five books of the Bible, the Torah, and that Joshua wrote the book of Joshua. He did not believe that the Bible was inspired by God or that He did anything described in the Bible. In 1878, he published “Prolegomena to the History of Israel.” His second book sought to trace Israel’s development through an entirely secular, non-supernatural view. He alleged that the Torah was compiled together from four separate sources. He named the four allegedly different sources as follows: (1) a Yahwist source (J), allegedly written c. 950 B.C. in the southern Kingdom of Judah; (2) an Elohist source (E), allegedly written c. 850 B.C. in the northern Kingdom of Israel; (3) a Deuteronomist (D), allegedly written c. 600 B.C. in Jerusalem during a reform; and (4) a Priestly source (P), allegedly written c. 500 B.C. by priests in exile in Babylon.

Today, his theory is called the “Documentary Hypothesis.” Under his view, Genesis one was written by a “Priestly writer” or his school in the 6th or 5th century B.C. By contrast, he alleged that Genesis 2 was written by a “Yahwist writer” or his school in the 10th century B.C.

Wellhausen drew his conclusion based upon three observations that others had raised before him. First, Genesis chapters one and two both talk about God’s creation of mankind. He assumed that this meant that the Jews at some point had two different creation accounts that they merged together. Second, while Genesis chapter one referred to God as “Elohim”, Genesis chapter two refers to Him both as “Elohim” and “Yahweh.” He assumed that there must have been one Jewish account of creation through people who believed in “Elohim” and a second creation account through a group of people who believed in “Yahweh.” He believed that these accounts were then merged together to unite Israel. To bolster his claim, he cited two others who claimed that there were alleged “contradictions” in the two Genesis creation chapters.

The traditional view for centuries was that Genesis chapter one talked about the order of appearance of the plants, the animals and humans through day six. Genesis two begins with the account of God’s rest from creation and mankind’s Sabbath. After the description of the Sabbath, Genesis chapter two briefly retells the creation of: (1) part of the water cycle on day two, (2) certain plants on day three; and (3) the creation of mankind on day six. It then provided a spiritual account regarding the reasons why God created mankind and the Garden of Eden.

Although some are troubled by the order reversals between the two chapters, Bible scholar Kenneth Mathews explains that the different orders stressed different points:

The different order in the creation of the animals and humanity between 1:1-2:3 and 2:4-25 has been taken as an irreconcilable conflict. Chapter 2, however, presents a topical order in the formation of the man and the animals (2:7, 19), giving priority to man’s role as master over Eden. Also in chap. 2’s narrative hierarchy, the making of the animals is subservient to the larger concern of the woman’s creation (vv. 18-25). The animals are paraded before the man to establish the suitability of the woman as his companion. Chapter 1, on the other hand, presents the creation of the birds and beasts before the creation of humanity to indicate a line of ascendancy in creation, from the lesser creatures to the superior mankind.1

Wellhausen, however, argued that the second account was inconsistent with the first because it does not retell the creation of the fish, birds, and animals before Adam. He argued that this must have meant that the accounts were drafted by different people and merged together.

It might be tempting to dismiss the Documentary Hypothesis as the deranged thoughts of an atheist. Yet, this theory is now taught in nearly every seminary school and in most Catholic schools to adolescents. Likewise, nearly every scholarly study on the Torah discusses it.

For many, the combined theories of evolution and the Documentary Hypothesis became the one-two punches against the claims made in the book of Genesis. Without the Church actively defending the Bible’s claims of its divine origin, the general public began to abandon it.

Under the circumstances, many believers might feel tempted to simply shrug their shoulders when asked about whether the book of Genesis is reliable. Yet, God calls upon each believer to know enough about the Bible to explain why they believe in it when asked: “but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence;” (1 Pet. 3:15). Thus, every believer is called upon to defend and explain the Bible with love.

The harmony between the two creation accounts. As set forth in the prior studies, God gave believers the tools within nature to refute the theories of macro-evolution (Ro. 1:20). He also gave believers the means to refute the Documentary Hypothesis. He provides several means to establish that the texts are divinely inspired through one author. These defenses to the integrity of the text and its single author are sevenfold. These include: (1) the seventh day falling in chapter two; (2) the pattern of seven sayings between days one and seven (which indicate the presence of a single author); (3) symmetry in the literary structure between Genesis 1:1 and 2:25 (which also indicates the presence of a single author); (4) the hidden pattern of the Hebrew word “Torah” (which is spelled out with every 50th letter in both the books of Genesis and Exodus); (5) reversal patterns that are found in Genesis two (which contradicts the argument that these reversal patterns only exist between Genesis one and two); (6) the Documentary Hypothesis rests upon multiple implausible conspiracies; and (7) Jesus’ certifications as to the accuracy of all parts of the Torah, including the book of Genesis.

1) The second account begins with day seven. Genesis chapter two begins with the statement: “Thus the heavens and the earth were completed, and all their hosts.” (Gen. 2:1). If Genesis chapter two were a separate account, the chapter would not begin by repeating that the heavens and earth were “completed”. The second chapter further begins with day seven, not day one: By the seventh day God completed His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done.” (Gen. 2:2). If one group of Jews followed only Genesis chapter two and later demanded that their separate account be merged with Genesis chapter one, then their god rested before doing any work. Or, their god had to rest after creating the heaven and earth in verse one and before creating the plants, animals and humans on the planet because he lacked the same creative stamina of the other alleged god in Genesis one.

2) The pattern of seven groups of sayings. A pattern of symmetry also exists between the two Genesis accounts through Moses’ seven literary sayings across the seven days. Bible scholar William D. Ramey explains these seven patterns of the number seven as follows:

(1) The announcement of the commandment: “And God said”, while occurring ten times, is grouped into seven (7x1) groups (Gen. 1:3; 6; 1:9; 1:11; 1:14, 1:20; 1:24; 1:26; 28; 29).

(2) The order formula: “Let there be . . .”, while occurring eight times, the formula is grouped into seven (Gen. 1:3; 1:6, 9; 1:11; 1:14; 1:20; 1:24; 1:26).

(3) The fulfillment formula: “And it was so” occurs seven times (Gen. 1:3; 1:7; 1:9; 1:11; 1:15; 1:24; 1:30).

(4) The execution formula: “And God made” occurs seven times (Gen. 1:4; 1:7; 1:12; 1:16; 1:21; 1:25; 1:27).

(5) The approval formula: “God saw that it was good” occurs seven times (Gen. 1:4; 1:10; 1:12; 1:18; 1:21; 1:25; 1:31).

(6) The subsequent divine word: God’s naming or blessing occurs seven times (Gen. 1:52; 1:8; 1:102; 1:22; 1:28).

(7) Seven days affirmed: There are seven days mentioned (Gen. 1:5; 1:8; 1:13; 1:19; 1:23; 1:31; 2:2).2

The last of this pattern of seven sayings continues into Genesis 2:2. If the chapters were drafted by separate authors, the pattern would have been confined to Genesis chapter one. This pattern is confirmation that the text had a single author; Moses guided by the Holy Spirit.

Advocates of the Documentary Hypothesis respond that the “Yahwist source” must have begun following the Sabbath with verse four of chapter two: “This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made earth and heaven.” (Gen. 2:4). Yet, this leads to even more absurd results. If this were true, the alleged Yahwist source would have had no description or details at all about the creation of the (1) the universe; (2) the stars; (3) the moon; (4) the Earth (5) the oceans; or (6) the fish. Instead, one group of Jews believed that their god started his description of creation with part of the water cycle. Because the advocates of the Documentary Hypothesis suggest that the Yahwist source is older, that also means that the Jews never had answers about what their god did before he created the first rain on the Earth. Finally, their god also never rested from creation while the later one did.

3) Symmetry in the literary structure between Genesis 1:1 and 2:25. Even if we were to assume that a separate Genesis text began at verse four of chapter two, at least three other perfect literary patterns exist between Genesis chapters one and two. These perfect patterns would not be possible if they were drafted separately and then pasted together.

First, Bible scholar Klaus Potsch explains that the two chapters form a perfect literary pattern between Genesis 1:1 and 2:25 with Genesis 2:3 at its center:

a 1:1-3 bareness of matter

b 1:4-5 separation of light and darkness

c 1:6-8 separation of the waters above and the waters below

d 1:9-10 separation of dry land and the sea

e 1:11-13 fulfilling of the earth

f 1:14-19 filling of the sky with lights to govern and to measure time

g 1:20-23 filling of the waters below and the waters above with animals

h 1:24-25 filling the land with animals (living beings)

i 1:26 God's concept of mankind

j 1:27 creation of mankind, transfer of image

k 1:28 mankind’s habitat - the earth

l 1:29-30 the basis of food for the living creatures

m 1:31 the heavens and earth made, day 6

n 2:1 God creation completed in content

o 2:2a God's creation completed in time

p 2:2b God rests on the 7th day

x 2:3a THE HOLY GOD BOTH BLESSED AND SANCTIFIED

p 2:3b God rests on the 7th day

o 2:3c God's works created and made

n 2:4a the heavens and earth created (finished, completed)

m 2:4b the heavens and earth made in a timespan

l 2:5-6 basis for life in the garden plants, moisture

k 2:7a man's origin = dust

j 2:7b man's creation, transfer of life

i 2:8 man's place = the garden

h 2:9 filling the garden with plants (tree of life)

g 2:10-14 filling the garden with water

f 2:15-17 filling the garden with a caretaker + measure for good and evil

e 2:18 fulfilling Adam's life

d 2:19-20 separation (discerning, naming) of the animals

c 2:21-23 separation of man and woman

b 2:24 separation of parents and children

a 2:25 bareness of man3

If the two Genesis accounts were randomly drafted at different times by two separate groups of Jews, this perfect pattern of symmetry in the structure would not exist. This again is confirmation that the two chapters had a single author through divine inspiration.

Second, Bible scholar Willian Shea documents another similar literary pattern between Genesis chapters one and two. In English, the two accounts of God’s creation of mankind would appear at first blush to be different:

Genesis 1:27 Genesis 2:23
And God created man in his image; In the divine image he created him, male and female created him. This now at last is bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh. This one shall be called Woman, for from Man was this one taken.

Yet, Shea explains that in Hebrew the two accounts have identical patterns when spoken: “It is remarkable that the counts are exactly the same for both passages, with 12 stress accents and 32 syllables in both passages.”4 This type of perfect symmetry in Hebrew would not be possible if these accounts were drafted by different people at different times and then pasted together. This perfect symmetry is again evidence of a single author through divine inspiration.

Third, Bible scholar J.B. Doukhan reveals a third pattern in the phrase “God said” between the two chapters. Between Genesis 1:3 and 1:31, the phrase “God said” appears exactly nine times, a number associated with the fruits of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22-23). Between Genesis 2:7 through Genesis 2:22, the phrase “the Lord God did/said” again appears exactly nine times.5 Again, these identical patterns would not exist if the texts were drafted at different times by different people and then merged together. They again confirm a single divinely inspired author.

4) The hidden pattern of the Hebrew word “Torah”. The Bible also is self-authenticated

through the repeating pattern of the Hebrew word Torah “תּוֹרָה”. Starting with the first Hebrew taw, every 50th letter in the books of Genesis and Exodus spells the Hebrew word “Torah.” (This pattern has nothing to do with the alleged Bible codes that some have claimed predict major world events.) Even the sequence of 50 spaces between each letter has meaning. In the Bible, the number 50 signifies revelation. The Jews marched in the wilderness for 50 days until Moses received the revelation of the Torah on Mount Horeb. The revelation of the Holy Spirit was also poured out on the early Church exactly 50 days after Christ’s resurrection. Consistent with the theme of revelation, the word “Torah” in Hebrew is derived from the root “ירה”, which in the “hif'il” conjugation means “to guide/teach.” (cf. Lev 10:11). If the Genesis text were cobbled together from entirely different sources, this repeating pattern would not exist. This pattern is the seal of the Holy Spirit upon the document. There is simply no way that multiple human authors could have randomly merged unrelated texts and formed this perfect repeating pattern.

5) Reversal patterns are also found in Genesis two. The primary argument for Genesis chapters one and two being from different sources rests upon the different listing orders that appear both before and after Genesis 2:4. Skeptics call these “contradictions.” Yet, if Genesis two were a separate document based upon this line of reasoning, one should expect Genesis chapter two to have the same listing order after verse four. Yet, it doesn’t. As yet another literary device, chapter two contains its own order reversals. As Bible commentator William H. Shea explains: “A chiastic element is also found in the second section in reference to the fowl of heaven and the beasts of the earth. The beasts of the earth precede the fowl of heaven in v. 19, but they follow them in v. 20.” “ . . . God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the sky, and brought them to the man . . . The man gave names to all the cattle, and to the birds of the sky, and to every beast of the field . . .” (Gen. 2:19-20).6 Thus, the reversal patterns between Genesis one and two are not evidence of different authors. They are instead evidence of a poetic devise used to convey a different theological point. The use of these literary patterns was important to early generations that could not read. The text was poetic when spoken in Hebrew. This in turn made it easier for people to memorize the text, repeat it and pass it on to the next generation.

6) The Documentary Hypothesis rests upon multiple implausible conspiracies. For the Documentary Hypothesis to be true, multiple implausible conspiracies had to exist. At least seven conspiracies were necessary for this hypothesis to be true.

(1) The first conspiracy merged the allegedly older Genesis chapter two text with the allegedly younger Genesis chapter one text. This conspiracy allegedly merged these texts together to form three of the five books of the Torah. This conspiracy was tighter than any other conspiracy in history. Miraculously, no one ever leaked it. The conspirators further managed to gather and destroy original source documents, which allegedly recorded the separate creation accounts. Then, they managed to brainwash an entire nation to forget their separate accounts that each group once considered sacred and accept a new hybrid story as if it were the original. Because the vast majority learned the text through memorization, this would be no simple task.

The theory that there were four sources would also logically mean that two of the four sources had no creation accounts. It also would have meant that each of the four sources had major sections of the Bible missing from their separate accounts. For example, if we were to base different sources upon the names used for God, only the Yahweh camp had any description of the Fall of Adam and Eve or the Abrahamic covenant. If the theory were true, only the Yahweh followers needed redemption, and only they would have formed a covenant with God. The animal sacrifices in Leviticus would also only be necessary for the Yahweh believers.

This would also mean that one group of Jews were comfortable openly using God’s name “Elohim” in everyday speech. Yet, a different group of Jews felt so strongly against saying God’s name “YHWH” that they banned saying it as part of the Third Commandment. In short, each of these four groups would have started with radically different religions.

(2) A second conspiracy allegedly happened when “the Deuteronomist '' created a forged book of Moses’ address to the people and falsely claimed within the book that Moses wrote it. This allegedly happened in 600 BC in Jerusalem during a reform. King Josiah recorded that he discovered the law during the last days of his reign (2 Kgs. 22:8-13). Some now claim - - without any evidence -- that Deuteronomy must have been written just before that. Others believed that King Josiah conspired to write the Deuteronomic code and then falsely claimed to have found it. Under either scenario, the author(s) falsely claimed in the book that Moses wrote it (Dt. 31:9, 24-26). Why would they do this? At the time, Judah was a vassal state of Assyria. Yet, during King Josiah’s reign, Assyria began to decline in power. Sometime around 622 B.C, King Josiah launched religious reforms. Following the format of vassal state covenants of the day, he or others allegedly wrote the Deuteronomic code as a covenant between the kingdom of Judah and Yahweh. The theory was that this was to create a sense of nationalism amongst the Jews and allow King Josiah to consolidate religious worship (and therefore) power in Jerusalem (See Dt. 12:5-7). If true, the book of Deuteronomy was not written until hundreds of years after Moses’ death, sometime between 1735 and 1480 B.C. Other critics later claimed that the first three chapters at the beginning and the chapters at the end did not appear until the end of the Babylonian exile in the late 6th Century B.C. To make the forgery seem authentic, the conspirators falsely recorded on multiple occasions that Moses wrote the book: “Moses wrote down this law and gave it to the priests, the sons of Levi . . .” (E.g., Dt. 31:9; 31; 24-26; 1:5-6; 9; 5:1; 27:1; 9; 29:2; 30; 33:1). Yet, to prevent further forgeries, these conspirators then added language to prevent others from doing what they had done: “Whatever I command you, you shall be careful to do; you shall not add to nor take away from it.” (Dt. 12:32; 4:2).

The Jews who treated the holy Torah as sacrosanct and memorized it allegedly had no objection when presented with the forgery. The conspirators were again able to gather up the original source materials and destroy all prior copies of the Torah that did not include Deuteronomy. A nation that had memorized the sacred Torah without Deuteronomy now relearned the new significantly revised Torah with objection.

(3) A third conspiracy allegedly happened in 500 B.C. At that time, the “Priestly source,” again, secretly rewrote the Torah while in exile in Babylon. They again managed to gather up and destroy all the original source materials. A nation that had memorized the sacred Torah, again, happily abandoned it and accepted the newest forgery without question. Although the last forgery contained warnings against further additions to the Torah, no one cared.

(4) A fourth conspiracy allegedly happened some later time when a redactor or editor added the word “Elohim” in front of the word “Yahweh” everywhere it appears in Genesis chapter two.7 In English, this can be seen by the words “the Lord God” multiple times between Genesis 2:4 and 3:24. The purpose of the fourth conspiracy was allegedly to cover up the first conspiracy. The editor allegedly sought to make it seem like the two texts were one by adding the word “Elohim” in front of the word “Yahweh”. Yet, for some unexplained reason, he also added this dual name in just one other place in the Torah in Exodus 9:30. This redactor, however, not only allegedly added the word “Elohim” in front of “Yahweh” in these two chapters of Genesis and in one verse of Exodus, he also allegedly deleted the word “Yahweh” in five verses of Genesis 3 and substituted it with the word “Elohim” for some reason that no one can explain. Miraculously, for a devout nation of Jews who learned the Torah through memorization, no one objected. Again, all the alleged source materials were gathered up and destroyed. Moreover, no archeological evidence was left of any of the prior source documents. This also meant that the literary patterns did not exist before these additions. While the fourth conspiracy had as a goal covering up the first by adding the word Elohim in chapter two, it by chance created the repeating word Torah with every 50th letter as an unintended bonus.

While the Documentary Hypothesis needs conspiracies on top of conspiracies to explain it, Bible scholar Kenneth Mathews gives a more logical explanation for God’s different names:

Elohim is appropriate for the majestic portrayal of God as Creator of the universe since it properly indicates omnipotent deity, whereas Yahweh is the name commonly associated with the covenant relationship between deity and His people: Israel (cf. 15:7; Ex. 3:14-15). Its combination with Elohim achieves an overlapping of these theological emphases: Yahweh, the Lord of His people, is in fact the all-wise and powerful Elohim-Creator. Hence, the antecedents of Israel’s precious communion with its Creator and Covenant Lord had its inception in the garden where man first knew that fellowship. The personal presence of Yahweh-Elohim among His people Israel was not an anomaly but the pattern God inaugurated from the beginning. Conversely, the absence of the name Yahweh in the conversation between the serpent and the woman (3:1-5), where treachery is contemplated, shows that the relationship with God as Covenant Lord is under assault.8

(5) A fifth conspiracy happened when the chapter breaks were later to the Torah. A chapter break was placed between days six and seven of the “Elohim” source to conceal this conspiracy. Again, no one objected, and no one said anything.

(6) A sixth conspiracy lasted for thousands of years as rabbis falsely taught that the forged Torah was actually being penned by Moses. Miraculously, not one rabbi ever leaked the conspiracy. Equally miraculous, their conspiracy was so tight that archeologists have never found evidence of the prior source documents.

(7) Finally, Jesus allegedly joined in the conspiracy by repeatedly referring to the Torah as a text that Moses wrote when Moses allegedly did not write it. (E.g., Mk. 10:4-5). He also repeatedly referred to the text as authoritative. For example, during His encounter with Satan in the wilderness in a weakened state, He quoted from Deuteronomy three times to rebuke Satan. (Matt. 4:1-10; quoting Dt. 8:3; 6:16; 5:7-9). After hearing these words, Satan fled (Matt. 4:11). For the Documentary Hypothesis to be true, Satan fled unaware of Deuteronomy’s fraudulent authorship. Or, both Jesus and Satan were duped by the conspiracy of the rabbis to believe in it.

Finally, in 1876, while sitting behind his desk, Wellhausen unraveled the multiple conspiracies that had been unnoticed by thousands of scholars over the centuries. He allegedly exposed a lie that even Jesus either repeated or failed to recognize.

Yet, if Wellhausen’s conspiracy discoveries were real, he was too modest in his proposals. If the different names for God is one of the indicators of separate authors, then why stop at only four alleged sources? God has no less than 21 names in the Old Testament.

The Hebrews understood that each name symbolized a different character trait about God, something that was apparently lost upon the German skeptic Wellhausen. These include: (1) Elohim (a name which appears more than 2,600 times in the Old Testament and symbolizes God’s majesty – It is the plural of the word “El” for God and speaks to the Supreme Triune Creator); (2) YHWH (Yahweh or Yehowah (a name which was not pronounced, yet appears 6,518 times in the Old Testament and symbolized the personal God of the covenant with Israel); (3) Jehovah (a substitute name for the unspeakable “YHWH”); (4) El Elyon (a name which appears 28 times in the Bible and means “the most high God”); (5) Adonai (a name appears in the Old Testament 434 times and means “Lord”); (6) El Roi (a name which means “the God who sees”) (Gen. 16:13); (7) El Shaddai (a name which appears seven times in the Bible and means “the Lord God Almighty”) (e.g., Gen. 17:1; 28:3; 43:14; 48:3; Ps. 91:1).; (8) El Olam (a name which appears at least four times in the Old Testament and means “God everlasting”) (Gen. 21:23; Jer. 10:10; Is. 26:4; 40:28-31); (9) Jehovah-Jireh (a name that appears once and means “Lord will provide”) (Gen. 22:13-14); (10) Jehovah-Raah (a name that appears several times in the Old Testament and translates as “Lord my healer”) (Gen. 48:15; 49:24; Ps. 23:1; 80:1); (11) Ehyeh or Ehye-Asher-Ehyeh, translated as “I will be” or “I Am that I Am.”) (Ex. 3:14); (12) Jehovah-Rapha (a name that appears only in Exodus 15:26 and means “to heal” or “to restore.”); (13) Jehovah-Nissi (a name that only appears once in the Old Testament and means “the Lord my banner”) (Ex. 17:15); (14) Jehovah-Maccaddeshem (a name that appears twice and means “the Lord who sanctifies”) (Ex. 31:13; Lev. 20:8); (15) Jehovah-Shalom (a name that only appears only in Judges 6:24 and means that “the God of peace”); (16) Yahweh Elohim Israel (a name that appears three times and means “The Lord, the God of Israel”) (Jud. 5:3; Isa. 17:6; 45:3); (17) Jehovah Sabbaoth (a name that appears several times and means “the Lord of Hosts or Lord of Armies”) (1 Sam 1:13; 17:45; Ps. 24:9-10; 84:3; Is. 6:5; Hag. 1:5); (18) Jehovah-Rohi (a name that means “the Lord is my shepherd”) (Ps. 23:1); (19) Jehovah-Tsidkenu (a name that only appears twice in the Old Testament and means “the Lord our righteousness”) (Jer. 23:6; 33:16); (20) Jehovah-Gmolah (the “Lord of Recompense”) (Jer. 51:6); and (21) Jehovah-Shammah (a name that only appears in Ezekiel 48:35 means that “the Lord is present” or “the Lord is there”). Thus, if the Documentary Hypothesis were true, there must have been more than 20 early Jewish religions. Only four made it into the final text.

In 1987, in his book “The Making of the Pentateuch”, R. N. Whybray points out other contradictions in the Documentary Hypothesis to show the theory rests upon illogical and contradictory assumptions. Proponents of the Documentary Hypothesis assert that the authors of the separate sources sought to avoid duplication. They claim that the first accounts had the Fall and the Abrahamic covenant. Yet, they were not repeated in the Bible to avoid duplication. They claim, however, that the alleged contradictions were kept in the combined text. There is, however, no evidence of this. Moreover, if this were true, why would they save alleged contradictions in the combined text? If their goal was to conceal their conspiracy, they allegedly left clues in the most obvious places. If they were not trying to hide their conspiracy, their actions would be openly discussed in the interpretive texts. The editors were apparently in such a hurry that they lacked the time to harmonize the combined texts. Whybray concludes: “Thus, the hypothesis can only be maintained on the assumption that, while consistency was the hallmark of the various [source] documents, inconsistency was the hallmark of the redactors!”9

If anyone has trouble imagining how the Jews would have treated these multiple secret revisions to the Torah that they had memorized and repeated for generations, just imagine how this would play out today. Suppose a group of scholars secretly got together and made additions to the Bible. Suppose further that they sent an e-mail to every believer across the world and told them that the Bible had been revised and that all prior Bible versions needed to be gathered up and returned to them for disposal. Both the new Bibles and the request to hand over the existing sacred texts would be largely ignored. By contrast, the Jews would have stoned the conspirators.

The only surprising fact about this centuries-long conspiracy is that it hasn’t yet been made into a Hollywood drama. That is exactly where this story belongs.

7) Jesus’ certifications of the Bible’s accuracy. Finally, Jesus proclaimed that every word of the Old Testament, down to the smallest letter, to be the accurate word of God: “For truly I say to you, until Heaven and Earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass away from the Law, until all is accomplished.” (Matt. 5:18). He also referred to the stories of creation, like Adam and Eve, as historical facts (Matt. 19:4). He further cited the lesson of God creating man and women for marriage from Genesis chapters one and two as authoritative during a confrontation with the Pharisees (Matt. 19:4; Mk. 10:6). The Apostle Paul also proclaimed, “All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work.” (2 Tim. 3:16-17). Using the Dead Sea Scrolls, scholars have also verified that the texts that Christ certified are the same used today. Under Wellhausen’s view, Jesus either did not know that the two creation accounts were forged documents from a conspiracy, or He knowingly repeated the lie by continuing the preach the forged text as authoritative. As C.S. Lewis once stated, Jesus was either “Lunatic, Liar, or Lord”. Simply put, you cannot believe Jesus is your Lord and also believe that the Documentary Hypothesis is true.

Seven lessons on God’s blessings from Genesis chapter two. Understood in its proper context, Genesis chapter two supplements God’s description of His creation in chapter one by revealing His blessings for His greatest creation, mankind. His blessings for mankind are sevenfold.

First, He gave us the gift of rest. From His rest from creation on His seventh day, He reveals that He has also blessed you with a day of rest to refresh you and draw you closer to Him. Through Christ, He will also bless you with rest from the struggle for salvation and a restful eternity with Him. Second, He gave us the Earth to manage. From His retelling of His creation of the rain from day two in chapter one, He reveals that rain is a symbol of His blessing upon the land to provide for mankind. He has blessed mankind with everything it needs on the Earth. Third, He has blessed us with life. From His revelation that He created Adam from the dust, He reveals that life is all blessing from Him. Fourth, He has blessed us with provision. From the account of His creation and His provision in the Garden of Eden, He reveals that He has blessed mankind with His provision. Fifth, He has offered us abundant life in Him. From the four mighty rivers that flowed from the Garden of Eden (a symbol of life), He reveals that He has blessed mankind with the opportunity for abundant life through Him. Sixth, He has blessed us with freedom. From the account of the two trees, He reveals that He blessed mankind with free choice. Finally, He has blessed us with love and companionship. From His creation of Eve and the first marriage, He reveals that marriage provides His blessings of love, companionship, and family.

1. The Sabbath: - God’s Gift of Rest in Him. Gen. 2:1-3.

(1) For believers in Christ, give thanks that He paid the penalty for breaking the Sabbath. In the Old Testament, the question of whether to follow the Sabbath was not taken lightly. God commanded that those who intentionally violated the Sabbath be put to death (Ex. 31:14). The penalty of death was further carried out by painful stoning (Nu. 15:33-36; Ez. 20:13). God even sent the Jews into 70 years of exile in Babylon for failing to observe the Sabbath years to allow the land to rest (2 Chr. 26:20-21). Orthodox Jews therefore still observe the Sabbath by doing no work. Yet, Christ came to fulfill the law (Matt. 5:17). For believers in Christ, our legal obligations were “nailed to the cross.” (Col. 2:14). Thus, Paul says “[l]et no man judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of . . . the Sabbath days.” (Col. 2:16). These things are the “shadow” of Christ (Col. 2:17; see also Gal. 4:10-11). Thus, the failure to observe any Ten Commandments is no longer a test of salvation (Jo. 3:16; Ro. 10:9-10). How should a believer respond? First, you should give thanks. If you know that your acts during God’s Sabbath are worthy of death under His law, you should give thanks for the penalty that Christ paid for you. Yet, if Jesus has paid your penalty, how should you use your new freedom? If you spend time engaged in selfish pursuits, are you really thankful for what Christ did? If you are free to ignore the Sabbath, can you ignore the other Nine Commandments? If not, why not? To answer these questions, we turn to Jesus.

(2) For believers in Christ, observing the Sabbath should be an act of love, not obligation. There is a difference between what one is legally obligated to do and what one may do as an act of devotion. Jesus warns us: “If you love Me, you will keep My commandments.” (Jo. 14:15, 21; 1 Jo. 5:3; 2 Jo. 1:6); “If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love; just as I have kept My Father’s commandments and abide in His love.” (Jo. 15:10); “[I]f you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.” (Matt. 19:17). The “Commandments” that He referred to were the Ten Commandments. He is the “I AM” who gave these Commandments to Moses at Mount Horeb (Ex. 3:14; Jo. 8:58). His “disciples” were the “disciplined ones” in keeping His Commandments. Whether you keep the Commandments out of love (and not obligation) is also a test regarding whether you “know” Him: “By this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments.” (1 John 2:3). Some will come to Jesus boasting of their works. Yet, if their works or their compliance with the Law is not motivated by a love for Jesus, He will respond “I never knew you.” (Matt. 7:23). In response to a question regarding “which is the great commandment in the Law?” Jesus did not drop the Sabbath Commandment. Instead, He included it with the other Nine Commandments as an act of devotion and love for God: “You shall love the Lord Your God with all your heart and with all your soul, and with all your mind.” This is the great and foremost commandment. The second is like it, “‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets.” (Matt. 22:35-40; Lk. 10:27; Dt. 6:5). Yet, God does not want your worship if you are burdened by it. He would also not want you to observe a Sabbath if it stressed you out or causes you to feel burden, loss or sorrow. If you can voluntarily observe a Sabbath while feeling joy and devotion, that fulfills “the great and foremost commandment.” (Matt. 22:8).

(3) Your freedom to observe the Sabbath any day, is not a freedom to never observe it. The Apostle Paul observed: “one person regards one day above another, another regards every day alike. Each person must also be fully convinced in his mind.” (Ro. 14:5-6). Many Christians will cite this verse for the proposition that the Sabbath no longer applies. Many feel emboldened to not attend church at all and spend the day pursuing personal matters. As long as the person is “fully convinced in his mind,” (Ro. 14:6) some might feel tempted to say who are we to say otherwise? And most churches avoid the subject. Thus, most believers have few memorized words on the subject that the Holy Spirit can use to instruct us (Jo. 14:26). What then did Paul mean? Paul was addressing a division that arose between Messianic Christians and the Gentile Christians about whether to observe the Kosher laws and whether to observe the Sabbath on its actual day of Saturday or on Sunday, “the first day of the week” when Christ rose from the dead (Mk. 16:9). Paul never addressed whether someone should not observe any kind of Sabbath. For the person who observed it on Saturday or Sunday, what mattered was that the person observed the day for the Lord and not for personal pursuits. In the very next verse, Paul observes: “He who observes the day, observes it for the Lord, and he who eats, does so for the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who eats not, for the Lord he does not eat, and gives thanks to God.” (Ro. 14:6). For those who might feel tempted to never go to church or serve God in some ministry, Paul then warns: “For not one of us lives for himself, and not one dies for himself; for if we live, we live for the Lord, or if we die, we die for the Lord; therefore whether we live or die, we are the Lord’s.” (Ro. 14:7-8). Paul then warns that: “we will all stand before the judgment seat of God . . . So then each one of us will give an account of himself to God.” (Ro. 14:10, 12). If it doesn’t matter what people do with their Sabbaths, God would not ask for each person to give “an account” of what he or she did with their time. God further observed that the Sabbath is His covenant that will be observed “forever”: “So the sons of Israel shall observe the Sabbath, to celebrate the Sabbath throughout their generations as a perpetual covenant.’ It is a sign between Me and the sons of Israel forever;” (Ex. 31:17). God would not say that the Sabbath would exist “forever” if it disappeared upon Christ’s death. During the Millennial Reign when God’s perfect rule is restored, people will treat the Sabbath as holy: “‘from Sabbath to Sabbath, all mankind will come to bow down before Me,’ says the Lord.” (Is. 66:22-23; Ez. 20:12-26). If the Sabbath disappeared at Christ’s death, it would not be observed when He returns.

(4) Keeping a “holy” Sabbath allows God to “refresh” your body. In Moses’ first reading of the Fourth Commandment, he tells us that God created for six days. He then “rested on the seventh day.” As a result, “the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.” (Ex. 20:11; Gen. 2:3). We were created in God’s image (Gen. 1:27). Like God did, we are expected to work hard six days a week as believers (1 Thess. 4:11 & 2 Thess. 3:10). Also like God, we too are commanded to rest one day a week. “[F]or in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, but on the seventh day He ceased from labor, and was refreshed.” (Ex. 31:17). The Sabbath in turn allowed people to “refresh themselves” (Ex. 23:12). Jesus revealed that He is Lord of the Sabbath (Luke 6:5). He meant to give our bodies and our minds the rest we need: “Jesus said to them, ‘The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath. So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath”’ (Mk. 2:27-28). Because of our original sin, all creation is condemned to struggle here on Earth (Gen. 3:17; 9:2; Rom. 8:19-22). The Sabbath foreshadows a day when, thanks to Jesus, we will no longer need to tire from the daily struggles of life (Heb. 4:9-10). Some people, however, believe that God is holding back the best in life with restrictions. Yet, countless studies have shown the importance of rest in preventing high blood pressure, weight gain, diabetes, anxiety, and other disorders. As Christians in recent years have chosen to ignore the Sabbath, is it any wonder that rates of hearts disease, depression, anxiety, sleeplessness, and stress have risen? If you want God to “fresh” you, (Ex. 23:12, 31:17) keep a voluntary Sabbath. Because God created you, He can do a better job refreshing you than you can. He promises that those who spend the Sabbath seeking after Him instead of their own pleasures will find great delight: “Then you will take delight in the Lord, and I will make you ride on the heights of the earth;” (Is. 58:13-14). As part of being refreshed, God promises to “bless” those who observe the Sabbath: “How blessed is the man who does this, and the son of man who takes hold of it; who keeps from profaning the Sabbath, . . .” (Is. 56:2, 5-7). John, for example, was blessed during his devotion during the Sabbath. He received his end time revelation while “in the Spirit on the day of the Lord.” (Rev. 1:10). Are you missing out on this blessing?

Mankind’s biological programming for a seven-day week. Because God has programmed mankind in His image, mankind has adopted a seven-day week across all cultures. Each time mankind has tried to move to a different cycle, the result has been disastrous. From October 1793 until April 1802, French revolutionaries tried to abandon the seven-day week along with other connections to the Bible. They adopted a 10-day week, called the décade. In the Bible, the number ten is a number associated with the Ten Commandments and judgment. Their experiment was a failure and soon abandoned. Communists in Russian also tried to break with the seven-day week because of its connections to the Bible. From 1929 through 1931, they imposed upon the USSR a five-day week. Their experiment also failed. In 1931, the communists tried a six-day week. Yet, this experiment also failed. In 1940, the USSR returned to the seven-day week used by the rest of the world. Despite the wide variety of cultures across the world, all use a seven-day week, and all have at least one day of rest. This is evidence of God’s fingerprints upon mankind. We are all made in His image.11

(5) Keeping a “holy” Sabbath allows time to worship and study God. In Moses’ second reading of the Fourth Commandment, he provides a second rationale for observing the Sabbath. In addition to giving your body rest, you are to use the time to meditate on the freedom from bondage that God has given you (Dt. 5:16). It is a day for you to study God’s Word and also a day to teach the Word to your children. As an example to us, Jesus taught in the Capernaum synagogue on the Sabbath (Lk. 4:31-43). Like the Jews, you have also been delivered from bondage. Like the Jews, you need to learn God’s Word. Like the Jews, your children also need to learn God’s Word. Yet, Jesus freed you from the obligation to do this because He only wants your freely felt devotion: “And when you offer a sacrifice of thanksgiving to the Lord, offer it of your own free will.” (Lev. 22:29 NKJV). If you find it a burden to read the Bible or to sing, don’t do it. That kind of worship is meaningless to God. Yet, if you are motivated by love and not by obligation, spending at least one day studying the Word and praying will be a “sweet aroma to God.” (Ps. 141:2; Rev. 5:8; 8:3).

(6) Keeping a “holy” Sabbath gives you the protection and accountability from God’s flock. You are warned not to “forsak[e] the assembling together, as is the habit of some. . . .” (Heb. 10:24-25). The reasons for this include encouraging one another, love, fellowship, and promoting good works. Paul, for example, envisioned that believers would use the Sabbath to attend church so that they could, among other things, collect and set aside money for God’s work (1 Cor. 7:1). The Bible reveals that we are like sheep, which are dumb and defenseless animals (Is. 53:6). Outside of the flock, you are most vulnerable to the devil’s attacks. A Sabbath that includes regular church or small study group attendance helps to protect you and keep you accountable. Have you placed yourself at risk for spiritual attack by separating from the flock? If you are part of a large church, have you found a small group or a prayer partner to stay accountable in your walk? Keeping the Sabbath with regular church attendance is also important to keeping oneself separated from the world. You are to be a salt and light in the world (Matt. 5:13-16). You are also called upon to be “unstained by the world.” (Jam. 1:27). Does your use of your Sabbath make you a light to others?

(7) Keeping a “holy” Sabbath gives you the opportunity to volunteer and help others. Finally, one of Jesus’ most interesting lessons stem from His many miracles and healings that took place on the Sabbath. While it is important that you: (1) rest; (2) study the Word; and (3) worship corporately, you are also commanded to use your time to help others. Consider the times the Pharisees attempted to charge Jesus with breaking the Sabbath. First, the Pharisees accused Him of breaking the Sabbath when He allowed His followers to eat grain in the field when they were hungry (Matt. 12:1-14; Mk. 2:23-28; Lk. 6:1-5). Jesus was merely repeating what David did for his men when they were hungry (1 Sam 21). The poor were allowed to glean the fields so that they would not go hungry (Ex. 23:10-13; Lev. 19:9-10; 23:22; Dt. 24:19-21). Jesus’ point was that “work” that involved helping the poor or the needy is not just an acceptable use of the Sabbath, it was one of its intended purposes. Second, the Pharisees also sought to charge Jesus when He healed on the Sabbath. These included the man with the withered hand (Matt. 12:9-21; Mk. 3:1-6; Lk. 6:6-11), the paralytic at the pool of Bethesda (Jo. 5:1-18), a woman who suffered from a disease for 18 years (Lk. 13:10-17), and a man swollen with fluids (Lk. 14:1). Jesus compared these acts to freeing a trapped animal on the Sabbath. He again wanted people to understand the work that involves helping others is expected on the Sabbath. The Jews had taken all the joy out of the Sabbath by their oppressive rules and regulations: “I hate your new moon festivals and your appointed feasts, they have become a burden to Me; I am weary of bearing them” (Is. 1:14; Ho. 2:11). His point was certainly not to ignore the Sabbath altogether. Instead, “[t]he righteous care about justice for the poor, but the wicked have no such concern.” (Prov. 31:9). God repeatedly tells us to practice “justice” for those in need (Prov. 28:5; Jer. 22:3; Eze. 18:21; Zeck. 7:9; Matt. 23:23). Jesus commands that we serve the poor, the sick, and the hungry (Matt. 25:31-46). When you devote your Sabbath to helping the persons in need, you are serving Christ: “I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me.” (Matt. 25:40). Part of “true religion” also involves helping those in need (Jam. 1:27). If you do nothing to help those around us, your faith is “dead” (Jam. 2:17-20). As many can attest, hard work on a day off from work to serve others is more fulfilling than a day spent serving oneself. Without a day off, your busy life will not give you the chance to help others. Do you use your day off to solely benefit yourself?

2. Rain – God’s Blessing Upon the Earth to Make it Habitable. Gen. 2:4-6.

Genesis 2:8-9 Genesis 2:15-17
    And Yahweh God planted a garden east of Eden, and he placed there the man whom he had formed.     And Yahweh God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden, to till it and to keep it.
    And Yahweh God caused to sprout from the ground every tree pleasant of appearance and good for food, and the tree of life in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowing good and evil.     And Yahweh God commanded the man, saying, "from every tree of the garden you may surely eat, but from the tree of knowing good and evil, you shall not eat from it, for in the day that you eat from it you shall surely die".

(Source12)

3. Life – God’s blessing of the Gift of Life. Gen. 2:7.

Michelangelo Buonarroti 1475 – 1564 AD (God’s Creation of Adam)

4. The Garden of Eden – the Gift of Fellowship, Provision and Comfort. Gen. 2:8-9.

Jheronimus Bosch 1450 – 1516 AD (Garden of Earthly Delights – Paradise)

5. The Rivers of Eden- the Gift of Abundant Life. Gen. 2:10-14.

http://ldolphin.org/eden/fig2.gif
(Source of chart:24)

Map of the Middle East with the erroniously proposed locations of the Garden of Eden

(chart source:26)

6. The Tree of Knowledge – The Gift to Choose Eternal Life. Gen. 2:15-17.

“The Greek version of the Bible describes this as ‘paradise.’ It was a paradise. Within Eden, Adam enjoyed fellowship with God. The Bible says that God met with man, walking in the garden under the trees in the cool of the day. In Eden, there was no striving, no competition, . . . . The tree of life represents the potential for immortality. God created man mortal, like all other creatures. Yet, He gave man the gift of choice. To achieve immortality, man needed only to reach out to the tree of life and eat its fruit. There was also another tree – the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. But the tree of knowledge was also a tree of death . . . This is an essential part of being human. We can choose good, which is the way of life, or disobedience, which results in death. We choose between the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil countless times each day.”27

http://christrescuemission.org/yahoo_site_admin/assets/images/tree_of_life_fruit_of_Spirit_.349182247_std.JPG

7. Marriage - the Gift of Love, Companionship and Family. Gen. 2:18-25.

Michelangelo Buonarroti 1475 – 1564 (God’s Creation of Eve)


  1. Kenneth Mathews, “The New American Commentary: An Exegetical and Theological Exposition of Holy Scripture” Genesis 1-11:26, Vol. 1A, (B&H Publishing Group Nashville Tenn. 1996) p. 190-191.↩︎

  2. Source: William D. Ramey April 5, 1997, InTheBeginning.org. http://www.inthebeginning.org/chiasmus/xfiles/xgen1_1-2_3.pdf. He also found a pattern of seven English paragraphs. Yet, the original text was written in Hebrew without the English paragraph breaks or punctuation.↩︎

  3. Source: Klaus Potsch, quoted by William D. Ramey (c) April 1997 by Christian Publishers’ Bookhouse; http://pdfsr.com/pdf/literary-analysis-of-genesis-1-1-2-3-introduction↩︎

  4. William H. Shea “Literary Structural Parallels Between Genesis 1 and 2, Biblical Research Institute, Silver Spring, Maryland, Origins 16(2):49-68 (1989).↩︎

  5. J.B. Doukhan “The Genesis Creation Story: Its Literary Structure” (Berrien Springs, Mich.: Andrews University Press) (1978) p. 78-79.)↩︎

  6. http://www.grisda.org/origins/16049.htm↩︎

  7. G. von Rad, “Genesis: A Commentary, rev. ed., trans. J. H. Marks, OTL (Philadelphia: Westminster 1973), p. 77.↩︎

  8. Kenneth Mathews, “The New American Commentary: An Exegetical and Theological Exposition of Holy Scripture” Genesis 1-11:26, Vol. 1A, (B&H Publishing Group Nashville Tenn. 1996) p. 191-192.↩︎

  9. R.N. Whybray, "The Making of the Pentateuch", 1987, quoted in Gordon Wenham, "Exploring the Old Testament", 2003, pp.173–174.↩︎

  10. Hugh Ross, “Navigating Genesis” (rtb press 2014) p. 86.↩︎

  11. Hugh Ross, “Navigating Genesis” (rtb press 2014) p. 85-86.↩︎

  12. William H. Shea “Literary Structural Parallels Between Genesis 1 and 2, Biblical Research Institute, Silver Spring, Maryland, Origins 16(2):49-68 (1989).↩︎

  13. Jack Collins “Discourse Analysis and the Interpretation of Gen. 2:4-7”, Westminster Theological Journal 61 (1999) 269-76.↩︎

  14. Kenneth Mathews, “The New American Commentary: An Exegetical and Theological Exposition of Holy Scripture” Genesis 1-11:26, Vol. 1A, (B&H Publishing Group Nashville Tenn. 1996) p. 196.↩︎

  15. D. Kidner, “Genesis”, TOTC (Downers Grove IVP 1967), p. 60.↩︎

  16. Hugh Ross, “Navigating Genesis” (rtb press 2014) p. 85-86.↩︎

  17. Kenneth Mathews, “The New American Commentary: An Exegetical and Theological Exposition of Holy Scripture” Genesis 1-11:26, Vol. 1A, (B&H Publishing Group Nashville Tenn. 1996) p. 201.↩︎

  18. Kenneth Mathews, “The New American Commentary: An Exegetical and Theological Exposition of Holy Scripture” Genesis 1-11:26, Vol. 1A, (B&H Publishing Group Nashville Tenn. 1996) p. 200.↩︎

  19. http://www.grisda.org/origins/16049.htm↩︎

  20. John Calvin, Commentary on Genesis, Volume 1, online at: www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom01.viii.i.html.↩︎

  21. E.g., James A. Sauer, "The River Runs Dry," Biblical Archaeology Review, Vol. 22, No. 4, July/August 1996, pp. 52–54, 57, 64↩︎

  22. Jeffrey Rose, “New Light on Human Prehistory in the Arabo-Persian Gulf Oasis,” Current Anthropology 51 (December 2010); quoted by Hugh Ross, “Navigating Genesis” (rtb press 2014) p. 98-99.↩︎

  23. Hugh Ross, “Navigating Genesis” (rtb press 2014) p. 98-100↩︎

  24. Dora Jane Hamblin, “Has the Garden of Eden been located at last?” http://ldolphin.org/eden↩︎

  25. Kenneth Mathews, “The New American Commentary: An Exegetical and Theological Exposition of Holy Scripture” Genesis 1-11:26, Vol. 1A, (B&H Publishing Group Nashville Tenn. 1996) p. 207.↩︎

  26. http://creation.com/has-the-garden-of-eden-been-found↩︎

  27. Torah Club, Unrolling the Scroll, Book 1 (First Fruits of Zion 2nd ed. 2014) p. 9↩︎

  28. Hugh Ross A Matter of Days (2nd ed. rtb press 2015) p. 72-73.↩︎